Questions Regarding Paedobaptism and the Regulative Principle

 

John,

Thank you for your willingness to entertain questions by email. The practical necessity of concluding each WCF session within the allotted fifty minutes understandably limits the opportunity for extended discussion of questions that naturally arise during the presentations.

The matters I raise here are, to some extent, “cabbage we have chewed before,” having grown out of prior correspondence with John Homann on this topic. I fully appreciate your responsibility to articulate and defend Northside’s position with respect to paedobaptism. My hope, however, is that you might also engage forthrightly with some of the theological challenges that attend that position.

Chief among these is the Regulative Principle of Worship, long embraced within the Reformed tradition (i.e., What Scripture does not command is forbidden.) This principle raises an unavoidable question with respect to paedobaptism, namely, the absence of either an explicit biblical command or inarguable example.

Closely related is the candid acknowledgment by numerous theologians and pastors—nearly all of whom nonetheless practice paedobaptism—that the practice is not explicitly taught in Scripture. By way of illustration:

• B. B. Warfield affirmed that infant baptism does not appear in Scripture.
• Schleiermacher wrote, “All traces of infant baptism which have been asserted to be found in the New Testament must first be inserted there.”
• Lutheran scholar Kurt Aland, following extensive study, concluded that there is no definite proof of infant baptism until after the third century, adding, “This cannot be contested.”
• Catholic theologian Haggelbacher similarly wrote, “This controversy has shown that it is not possible to bring in absolute proof of infant baptism by basing one’s argument on the Bible.”
• John MacArthur, though a Reformed credobaptist, articulates the issue starkly when he states that infant baptism is neither mentioned, commanded, nor exemplified anywhere in Scripture, rendering it impossible to prove biblically from either the New or Old Testament.

As you know, support for paedobaptism therefore rests not on direct biblical warrant, but on theological inference and ecclesial tradition.

Finally, the early witness of Tertullian is worth noting. While not rejecting infant baptism outright, he offered several cautions regarding the practice, including:

1. That baptism should be delayed.
2. That sponsors should not be placed in jeopardy if the child were to fail in fulfillment of their promises.
3. That children should be permitted to come to Christ when they are able to know Him.
4. That baptism should be reserved for those who know how to ask for salvation.

I offer these observations not polemically, but in the hope of thoughtful and faithful engagement regarding issues with which many in the Reformed community continue to wrestle. I appreciate your time and your willingness to consider these concerns.

Guideline for Filing a Complaint with the Wisconsin Bar for an Unwaived Conflict of Interest

 

1. Understand the Nature of the Alleged Misconduct

Wisconsin attorneys are bound by the Wisconsin Rules of Professional Conduct, which prohibit representation involving a conflict of interest unless specific conditions are met. In general terms, an attorney may not represent a party adverse to a former or current client in the same or a substantially related matter unless:

• The conflict is fully disclosed,
• The client is informed in writing, and
• The client gives knowing, written consent (waiver).

Proceeding to represent an adverse party in the same action—without waiver—is typically considered a serious ethical violation, not a mere misunderstanding or tactical dispute.

Your complaint should therefore focus on:

• The existence of the attorney-client relationship,
• The absence of informed written waiver, and
• The attorney’s subsequent adverse representation in the same matter.

2. Gather and Organize Supporting Documentation

Before filing, assemble copies (never originals) of all relevant materials, including:

• The retainer agreement or engagement letter
• Emails, letters, or texts establishing representation
• Court filings showing the attorney later appeared for the opposing party
• Any correspondence showing no conflict disclosure or waiver
• Docket sheets or case captions demonstrating it was the same action

Arrange these documents chronologically. Clear organization significantly strengthens credibility and efficiency in review.

3. Identify the Correct Disciplinary Authority

Attorney discipline in Wisconsin is administered through the Wisconsin Office of Lawyer Regulation, which operates under the authority of the State Bar of Wisconsin and the Wisconsin Supreme Court.

Complaints are not handled by the attorney’s law firm, nor by the court where the case is pending.

4. Prepare a Clear, Factual Written Complaint

Your complaint should be measured, factual, and precise. Avoid emotional language or speculation about motives. A helpful structure is:

1. Your identification
• Name, address, phone, email
2. Attorney identification
• Full name, firm, city, bar number (if known)
3. Statement of facts
• When the attorney was retained
• The matter for which he was retained
• Confirmation that no conflict waiver was sought or granted
• When and how the attorney later appeared against you in the same action
4. Nature of the violation
• Representation of an adverse party in the same matter
• Absence of informed written consent
• Resulting prejudice or risk of misuse of confidential information
5. Attachments
• List of documents included

Clarity and restraint carry far more weight than rhetoric.

5. File the Complaint

You may file the grievance by:

• Completing the official grievance form available from the Office of Lawyer Regulation, or
• Submitting a detailed letter containing the same information

Complaints may be filed by mail or electronically, following the OLR’s current submission instructions.

Be sure to:

• Sign the complaint
• Keep a complete copy for your records

6. Cooperate with the Investigation Process

After submission:

• The OLR may request additional information
• The attorney will typically be asked to respond
• You may be contacted for clarification or supplemental documentation

The process is investigative, not adversarial. The purpose is to determine whether professional discipline is warranted—not to award damages or reverse litigation outcomes.

7. Understand the Scope and Limits of the Process

An OLR grievance can result in:

• Dismissal,
• Private or public reprimand,
• Suspension or revocation of license.

It does not:

• Provide financial compensation,
• Replace a malpractice action,
• Automatically affect the outcome of your case.

If litigation consequences remain ongoing, you may wish to consult independent counsel regarding remedies separate from the disciplinary process.

Closing Perspective

A lawyer’s duty of loyalty is foundational—not merely procedural. When an attorney crosses the line into adverse representation in the same matter without informed consent, the disciplinary process exists precisely to safeguard trust in the profession.

St. Paul's (Concordia)

Mom said I could share with you the story behind what happened at St. Paul’s Lutheran School. At the time, the synod was planning to close both the junior college and the high school.

We had just finished a Bible study that met in the space above our clinic. As we were talking about what our next study might be, Mom spoke up and said, “Why don’t we start a Save Our School—SOS—campaign to save St. Paul’s?” Mom indicated that many people would be upset if made aware of synod's plans and would have wanted to know what to do about it. Mom wanted to make certain that people were made aware of the impending closure. We all agreed it was the right thing to do, though we had no idea where to begin.

Our first thought was to hold a small planning meeting in the studio above the clinic. But once we contacted the local newspaper, everything changed. Radio and television stations reached out, asking us to do public service announcements. Before long, requests for information were coming in from all over the country.

We briefly considered meeting at City Hall, but it quickly became clear that it wouldn’t be large enough. Eventually, we settled on the Concordia Farmers Mutual building as the proper venue—the largest venue available in the area at that time. It was standing room only. Local Lutheran churches asked us to come speak, and many of them joined in the effort. (Apparently, many of them contacted synod to express their concerns.) 

A Lutheran pastor stood with us to present the case for saving both the high school and the junior college. We were informed that synod was inundated with letters, phone calls, etc. We’ll probably never know exactly what happened behind the scenes at synod, but after that gathering, we received word that synod reversed course, and the high school would remain open. Sadly, the junior college was closed.

It’s hard to imagine what Concordia would have become if both schools had been lost. Think of the thousands of lives touched for Christ through that school—pastors, administrators, laypeople, and so many others.

I thank God for Mom’s courage in lighting that candle, and I am so deeply proud of her. I hope you are too.

Synopsis: Challenges to Infant Baptism

 

Infant Baptism Challenges

 

B. B. Warfield . . . affirmed that infant baptism does not appear in the Scripture.

Regulative principle: If Scripture doesn’t command it, it is forbidden

By the 2nd and 3rd centuries, concern regarding original sin and the eternal destiny of children—began to advocate for infant baptism. (Origen and Cyprian of Carthage) 

Dr. John MacArthur stated "Infant baptism is not in Scripture. And against that statement there is no evidence. There is no refuting of that statement. Scripture nowhere advocates infant baptism; it nowhere mentions infant baptism; it doesn’t exist in the Bible. There is no example of it; there is no comment on it; it’s not there. It is therefore impossible to prove that infant baptism is valid from the New Testament. It’s impossible to support it from the New Testament or, for that matter, from the Old Testament.

German theologian Schleiermacher wrote, “All traces of infant baptism which have been asserted to be found in the New Testament must first be inserted there.”

A Lutheran professor, Kurt Aland, after intensive study of infant baptism, says there is no definite proof of the practice until after the third century. And he says, “This cannot be contested.”

Catholic professor of theology, Haggelbacher, writes, “This controversy has shown that it is not possible to bring in absolute proof of infant baptism by basing one’s argument on the Bible.” 

Tertullian offers four suggestions for baptism of infants:

1.      Should have their baptism delayed.

2.      Why should the sponsors be put into danger by the failure of the little child to fulfill the promises of the sponsors?

3.      Should not be forbidden to come but be permitted to come to Christ “when they have become able to know Christ."

4.      Should not be given baptism until they “know how to ask for salvation”

Comparative Sacramental Theology (Reformed ; Lutheran; Anglican Theology)

I. Comparative Sacramental Theology

1. Reformed (Westminster): Spiritual Presence, Covenant Signs

The theology of the sacraments articulated in the Westminster Confession of Faith is often described as highly sacramental without being sacerdotal.

Key features:

• Sacraments are signs and seals of the covenant of grace

• A real spiritual relation exists between sign and thing signified

• Efficacy depends on Christ’s institution and the Spirit’s work, not the moment of administration

• Christ is really present in the Supper, but spiritually, not bodily

• Faith is the instrument of reception

This framework preserves objectivity (God truly gives) without collapsing into automatism or metaphysical speculation.

2. Lutheran Theology: Sacramental Union and Bodily Presence

Classical Lutheran theology, as articulated in the Augsburg Confession, affirms a more robust account of Christ’s bodily presence in the Lord’s Supper.

Key distinctions:

• Christ’s body and blood are truly present “in, with, and under” the bread and wine (often called sacramental union)

• The Supper conveys grace objectively, even to the unworthy (though not savingly)

• The presence is bodily, not merely spiritual, yet without transubstantiation

• Greater emphasis on Christ’s words of institution (“This is my body”)

Lutherans worry that the Reformed view risks thinning the Supper into subjectivity, the Reformed worry that the Lutheran view risks binding Christ’s glorified body too closely to earthly elements.

Despite this difference, both reject transubstantiation and affirm that the Supper is far more than remembrance.

3. Anglican Theology: Deliberate Theological Latitude

Anglican sacramental theology occupies a broad middle space, formally defined by the Thirty-Nine Articles and liturgically shaped by the Book of Common Prayer.

Key characteristics:

• Only two sacraments of the Gospel (Baptism and the Lord’s Supper)

• Rejection of transubstantiation as “repugnant to Scripture”

• Affirmation of real participation in Christ, without dogmatic precision on how

• Strong emphasis on reverent reception, repentance, and faith

Historically, Anglicanism has housed:

• Reformed-leaning interpretations (especially among Puritans and evangelicals)

• High Church or Anglo-Catholic views, approaching Roman Catholic realism

In this sense, Anglican theology is intentionally less confessional and more liturgical, allowing sacramental unity amid theological diversity.

II. How Chapters 27–29 Shaped Reformed Worship and Pastoral Practice

1. Word-Centered Worship

Westminster’s sacramental theology ensured that preaching remained central. The sacraments were never sidelined, but they were always:

• Interpreted by the Word

• Guarded from ritualism

• Integrated into covenantal proclamation

This produced a worship pattern in which:

• The sermon explains the gospel

• The sacraments visibly confirm the same gospel

• Christ speaks first; the church responds

2. Pastoral Oversight and “Fencing the Table”

One of the most distinctive historical consequences was the practice of fencing the Lord’s Table.

Rooted in Chapter 29, this involved:

• Catechetical preparation for communicants

• Self-examination encouraged from the pulpit

• Church discipline exercised pastorally, not punitively

The goal was not exclusion, but protection of souls and reverence for Christ’s ordinance. This practice profoundly shaped Reformed pastoral identity: ministers were not ritual technicians, but watchmen of the covenant.

3. Catechesis and Covenant Formation

Because baptism was understood as covenantal rather than magical, Reformed churches invested heavily in:

• Catechisms (Shorter and Larger)

• Household instruction

• Public profession of faith

Baptism marked the beginning of a long pastoral journey, not the end of one. This produced generations of Christians formed by teaching, discipline, and communal responsibility.

4. Frequency and Reverence of Communion

Historically, many Reformed churches practiced less frequent communion (monthly or quarterly), not from indifference, but from fear of trivialization.

While this has been debated and often revised in modern practice, the original impulse was pastoral:

• The Supper should never be routine

• Preparation mattered

• Reverence guarded joy

Even where frequency increased, the Westminster framework ensured that depth was never sacrificed for immediacy.

---

III. A Final Integrative Observation

What distinguishes the Westminster vision is not austerity, but theological restraint in service of pastoral care.

• Against Rome: it denies a sacrificing priesthood

• Against Zwinglianism: it denies mere symbolism

• Against Lutheranism: it denies bodily localization

• Against enthusiasm: it denies private administration

Yet it affirms—quietly but firmly—that Christ truly gives Himself to His people through outward means He Himself appointed.

In that sense, Chapters 27–29 are not merely doctrinal guardrails; they are a pastoral theology of assurance, teaching believers to trust not their experience, but God’s promise—spoken, seen, and sealed.

Chapter 29 — Of the Lord’s Supper

 

Chapter 29 — Of the Lord’s Supper

1. Purpose of the Supper

The Lord’s Supper was instituted by Christ to be observed frequently until His return. Its purposes include:

• Remembrance of Christ’s sacrifice

• Spiritual nourishment and growth

• Strengthening of faith

• Renewed covenant commitment

• Communion with Christ and His people

The Supper does not repeat Christ’s sacrifice. It proclaims it. The table is not an altar; Christ is not re-offered. His atonement is once-for-all and fully sufficient.

---

2. Presence Without Transformation

The Confession rejects transubstantiation and any notion that the bread and wine are changed in substance. The elements remain bread and wine.

Yet the Supper is far more than mental recollection.

Christ is really, spiritually present—not corporally or locally, but by the Holy Spirit. Believers truly feed upon Christ by faith, receiving all the benefits of His death and resurrection.

Again, the distinction is crucial:

• Bread and wine are the signs

• Christ and His benefits are the things signified

• Faith is the instrument of reception

• The Spirit is the agent of efficacy

Unbelievers may receive the elements, but they do not receive Christ. Indeed, they eat and drink judgment—not because the sacrament is magical, but because covenant signs must be approached with discernment.

---

3. Fencing the Table

The Supper is for those who:

• Profess faith in Christ

• Examine themselves

• Discern the Lord’s body

This necessitates pastoral oversight. The table belongs to Christ, not to the individual, and the church has a responsibility to guard it lovingly but faithfully.

Hence the strong insistence that the Supper be administered by ordained ministers, who preach the Word, explain the sacrament, and oversee its faithful use.

---

4. Unity of Word and Sacrament

In both Baptism and the Supper, Chapters 28 and 29 demonstrate the Confession’s central conviction:

The sacraments never stand alone.
They are the visible Word, confirming what the preached Word declares.

Detached from preaching, sacraments become either ritualism or sentimentality. Joined to the Word and received by faith, they become powerful means by which Christ assures, nourishes, and strengthens His people.

---

A Closing Pastoral Word

Taken together, these chapters present a deeply reverent, Christ-centered sacramental theology—one that avoids both bare symbolism and sacramental magic. Baptism marks our entry into the covenant community; the Supper sustains us along the pilgrim road.

Both proclaim the same gospel:

Christ given for sinners—received by faith alone yet graciously confirmed through visible signs ordained by God.

Westminster Confession of Faith Chapter 28 — Of Baptism

 

Westminster Confession of Faith

Chapter 28 — Of Baptism

1. The Meaning of Baptism: Sign and Reality

Baptism is described as a sacrament of the New Testament, ordained by Christ, with a rich cluster of meanings. It signifies and seals:

• Ingrafting into Christ

• Remission of sins

• Regeneration by the Spirit

• Adoption and covenant inclusion

• Obligation to walk in newness of life

Here the Confession is careful and precise:
Baptism does not regenerate automatically, nor is grace inseparably tied to the moment of administration. Yet neither is baptism an empty symbol. It is a true means of grace, because God has freely attached His promises to it.

The water is the sign; union with Christ and cleansing from sin are the things signified. The efficacy of baptism depends not on the water, nor on the minister, but on God’s appointment and the Spirit’s work, received by faith.

2. Who May Be Baptized

Baptism is to be administered:

• Once only, as the sign of covenant entrance

• To those who profess faith in Christ

• And to the infants of one or both believing parents

Infant baptism rests on covenant theology rather than presumed regeneration. The child receives the sign of the promise, not a guarantee of salvation. Baptism places the child within the visible church and under its nurture, discipline, and prayers—anticipating faith rather than replacing it.

Thus, baptism looks forward as well as backward: it binds God’s promise to the individual and binds the individual (or the child’s household) to a life of faith and repentance.

3. Mode and Minister

The Confession affirms that baptism is rightly administered by pouring or sprinkling with water, emphasizing meaning over method. Immersion is not denied, but it is not required.

Consistent with Chapter 27, baptism is to be administered only by a lawfully ordained minister of the Word, because it is a public covenant act of Christ toward His church—not a private devotional rite.